strong indication going 'round, is about the T testing out a couple of the new Siemens Charger this winter, and POSSIBLY exchanging all the HSP's if they test well....a strong rumor I heard this week from a very reliable source

After it's become clear just how hard Siemens has cracked it out of the park with the Chargers, it's not surprising that the T might have a little case of traction envy now that the test results are out.

Also it has been mentioned in other threads that the long-term durability of the QSK-95 prime mover has not been proven, some other cummins motors apparently have required overhauls earlier than the maintenance schedule predicts.

Their tier-IV emissions control requires urea injection.

On the other hand, tier-IV emissions are a huge improvement for air quality and soil contamination near CR lines. Maybe the NIMBYs will embrace the Chargers.

How does the fuel efficiency and operating costs compare between an HSP-46 and a Charger?

Would be nice if the T would use the Chargers to replace the Frankengeeps and the F40PHs. Older power probably nice from an ease of maintenance POV, but it's been 10-15 years since the F40PHs have been rebuilt, and IIRC the fleet plan has them phased out in the 2020s. This would be a great chance to get in on an existing product that happens to fit the T's needs.

Of we all know how much the T looooves its over customization of it's rolling stock, so I'd give it a 50/50 chance of actually happening.

It's speculation of course, but remember: no matter how extensively they rebuild the F40PH-2C's for 10, 20, whatever more years of service...there's still no in-house solve for the Geeps' mortality. Those one-of-a-kind mid-90's Franken-microprocessor mods are something no rebuilder is ever going to touch. And the assessment on original components and metal fatigue in the carbodies is likely to set an upper limit on plausible life extension too many years short for the required money (i.e. spend identical $$$ rebuilding 1988-era -2C and a '73-era Geep...but the Geep only gets rated for an iffy 7-10 more years more service while the -2C is good for 15+). Don't forget, the GP40's are 5 years older than the stored Screamers...Screamers whose rebuild prospects ended up way more pessimistic in-practice than first hoped after the decade-younger -2C's started showing far excess wear for their age.

They will have to buy 20 more locos, hell or high water, even if this -2C rebuild program really does stretch its dollar far enough to return "like new" units akin to Metra's F40PH-3's and Metro North's F40PH-3C's (and I'm not convinced this program is being funded well enough to give much hope for the active fleet buried deep in the contract options). Maybe that replacement will end up being pickups-n'-rebuilds of something else used. After all, Amtrak has been rumored for 6 months now to be satisfied enough with the Chargers that it'll begin draining the 150 national options on that contract as soon as this Fall/Winter...which will put 100+ eminently durable P42DC's on the aftermarket for commuter rail operators to snap up dirt cheap for supplemental power, in-situ rebuilds at current factory spec, or more ambitious upgrades. But right now, today, it's not known exactly what fiscal year those are going to be made available for re-sale or whether Amtrak's going to play it close-to-vest keeping them in storage for X months or years before offering up. So they'd be smart to go grab a Charger for a test drive and evaluate that platform, simply to cover bases for those market unknowns. Buying new--and throwing Cummins into the mix with the GEVO-12's and EMD 645 prime movers they're already juggling--may well end up a better deal to pay for up-front rather than picking up the -2C rebuild options for the full fleet if the eval tells them something they don't know. It can't hurt when there's still several possible outcomes to how the available new/old/borrowed solutions price out.

But any which way, time is running out on the Geeps within the next 3-5 years tops and they have to come up with something because another rebuild certainly won't be in the cards.

It still seems like a passable GEVO rebuild for the Bennie's is GE's deal to lose. I know MPI probably wants nothing to do with GEVO prime movers or AC traction, but a GEVO+AC rebuild of the hundreds of Genny carbodies about to hit the secondhand market could very well end up moving as many units as they sold MP36's if they pitched it right, particularly as a lower-cost/lower-complexity alternative for transit agencies that might be a little fearful of the cost of buying and maintaining a modern monster like the F125 or the Charger.

Cummins brochure claims that their Tier-IV interim has better fuel economy than their Tier-III, and their Tier-IV final (with urea-water treatment i.e. urine) has still better fuel economy, enough that the fuel savings pays for the urine. Btw, the urea-water freezes into a yellow Popsicle at 11 degrees F No idea how the Cummins Tier-IV(something) fuel economy compares to the GE Tier-III.

RenegadeMonster wrote:Also, if urea-water freezes at 11 degrees, does that mean the Cummings are not reliable in the winter in colder climates?

I'd imagine there is probably some sort of tank heater system similar to the cooling water heating setup on an EMD diesel.

The much scarier prospect, at least from a maintenance perspective, is having to deal with smaller (displacement) engine, more highly stressed, spinning at over twice the RPM of a 645, 710, or GEVO, all while having nearly an order of magnitude more moving parts than an EMD engine.

That's what you get with either the Cummins QSK in the Charger or the Cat in the F125. They should do OK in Amtrak service, but under the transit industry duty/maintenance cycle, that's the kind of stuff that makes mechanics wake up in puddles of sweat in the middle of the night.